STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
JUNIOR H. THORNTON, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a First District Court of Appeal decision that reversed a conviction for possession and delivery of marijuana over five grams. The Court held that while the evidence was insufficient for the greater charge, it supported conviction for the lesser included offense of simple possession of not more than five grams.
The Court affirmed that evidence was insufficient for the greater charge of possession and delivery of more than five grams, but held that it was sufficient to support conviction for the lesser included offense of possession of not more than five grams of marijuana as a first-degree misdemeanor.
[1] A conviction for possession and delivery of a dangerous drug requires sufficient evidence to support the charges.
[2] A mere puff on a marijuana cigarette is insufficient evidence to support a conviction for possession.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In State v. Eckroth, 238 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1970), we held that smoking a pipe filled with marijuana as it was passed around was sufficient to sustain a conviction for possession and there was no need to show that the pipe or the marijuana belonged to the individual smoking the prohibited drug.”
Establishes the legal principle that actual possession of marijuana can be proved by smoking it without proof of ownership.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJunior H. Thornton was charged with possession and delivery of more than five grams of marijuana. At trial, evidence showed that Thornton briefly puff…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Delivery Of Marijuana cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review a decision of the First District Court of Appeal reported at 306 So. 2d 205 (Fla.App. 1st 1975).
The respondent was charged and convicted in the trial court with possession and delivery of a quantity of marijuana in excess of five grams. The primary thrust of the prosecution was to establish respondent as a party to a sale of approximately one pound of marijuana.
The First District reversed the conviction of respondent for possession and delivery of a dangerous drug upon finding insufficient evidence to support the charges. In doing so, it noted that the evidence adduced at trial included testimony that respondent, at the scene of the crime, briefly puffed on a marijuana cigarette. The inference from the opinion is that a mere puff on a marijuana cigarette is insufficient evidence to support a conviction for possession.
In State v. Eckroth, 238 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1970), we held that smoking a pipe filled with marijuana as it was passed around was sufficient to sustain a conviction for possession and there was no need to show that the pipe or the marijuana belonged to the individual smoking the prohibited drug. The decision in the instant case appears to conflict with the Eckroth decision. We have jurisdiction. Article V, Section 3(b) (3), Florida Constitution.
We agree with the First District that there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction for possession and delivery of more than five grams of marijuana. The evidence, however, does support a convic tion of respondent for the lesser included offense of possession of not more than five grams of cannabis, a misdemeanor of the first degree. Sections 404.15(1) and 404.02(5), Florida Statutes (1971).
We reverse and remand to the District Court with directions that the cause be remanded to the trial court for entry of a judgment of conviction for the lesser included offense of possession of not more than five grams of marijuana. Section 924.34, Florida Statutes (1973); e. g., Bornstein v. State, 54 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1951).
Reversed in part and remanded.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Avery Jones v. State, 589 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…w, of insufficient quantity to justify a possession charge. We do not agree. It is fully established in the Florida cases that “the quantity [of drugs] possessed is immaterial.” State v. Eckroth, 238 So. 2d 75, 77 (Fla.1970); see State v. Thornton, 327 So. 2d 227 (Fla.1976); Jefferson v. State, 549 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); see also Evans v. State, 543 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). This is the inevitable result under the statute which, of course, makes no qualification as to the amount of controlled s…1 / 2
-
Sanders v. State, 563 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…rchase, sale or delivery of cocaine, and possession of cocaine, are, REVERSED. MINER, J., and THOMPSON, FORD L. (Retired), Associate Judge, concur. . See, Thornton v. State, 306 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), reversed in part, State v. Thornton, 327 So. 2d 227 (Fla.1976) (evidence that defendant went to a car in which participants in sale of marijuana were seated, saw what he supposed was bag of marijuana, and took a "puff" on a "reefer” passed to him on the outside, insufficient to support conviction for…
-
Buggs v. State, 268 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…session of cocaine and only sentence Buggs for delivery of cocaine as the highest offense charged. See Williams v. State, 69 So. 2d 766, 767 (Fla. 1953); Thornton v. State, 306 So. 2d 205, 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), reversed in part on other grounds, 327 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1976); Wilson v. State, 293 So. 2d 81, 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); see also Caivano v. State, 276 So. 2d 245, 245 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973) (holding that though Caivano was convicted of both possession of cocaine and sale of cocaine, he should have only r…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Eckroth, 238 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1970)
- Thornton v. State, 306 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)